Thursday, August 05, 2010

Rachel Maddow and David Letterman

I pasted a clip below of an interview by David Letterman of TV/radio personality Rachel Maddow. On this clip Maddow and Letterman were talking about the Shirley Sharrod incident and Letterman says that Breibart just "makes up anything he wants and then Fox gets a hold of it and reports it as factual, factual, factual."

Since Letterman is so concerned about what is "factual" he should get his facts straight. While a couple commentators like Bill O'Reilly did assume the story was factual, Fox News did not report the story at all except to show that Breitbart's clip was taken out of context!

If Letterman is going to hold the entire Fox News channel responsible for the statements of some of its commentators, then Letterman should have the consistency and integrity to hold MSNBC news responsible for every asinine statement coming out of the mouths of the likes of Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann. Letterman's agenda, of course, is just to smear Fox News.

Later in the interview, Letterman acknowledges that the White House responded in a "knee jerk reaction" by having Sharrod pulled over by the road to demand that she submit her resignation on the spot, but both Letterman and Maddow give the White House a pass since the White House later apologized for jumping on the story to soon.

Bill O'Reilly, however, also apologized for jumping on the story too soon so why didn't Letterman and Maddow give O'Rielly a pass? Their attacks on Fox News and O'Reilly have nothing to do with the facts. It has everything to do with the fact that Letterman and Maddow are Leftists who hate conservatives.

The fact is that reporters and commentators get paid to report and comment on the news as it breaks. Anyone who has any intelligence understands that this is the very nature of news and that news very often needs to be revised, modified and clarified as more information comes in. When news is reported inaccurately, an organization or person of integrity will provide a correction and, if needed, an apology, which is exactly what O'Rielly did.

For an employer, on the other hand, to take a knee jerk reaction to an internet report by firing someone on the spot is inexcusable! Both Letterman and Maddow ignore this fact but we can be absolutely sure that if it had been the Bush administration that had acted so rashly and unjustly, both Maddow and Letterman would not have missed the point.

In the interview, Maddow then says Fox exhibits a pattern of running stories about "scarry black people" Her first example is "the USDA," i.e. Sharrod. But as I said, the only thing Fox News reported about this story was that the clip had been taken out of context.

Maddow's second example was about "scary black people stopping white people from voting." But those black people were actually convicted by the Justice Department of voter intimidation. What made this big news is that the Obama administration refused to sentence them! Should Fox News have ignored the story? Why? Because the criminals were black? To ignore the story simply because of the color of the criminal's skin would have been racist. The real question, then, is why the mainstream media did not report it.

Maddow's third example was about "scary black people" stealing the election, "the whole ACORN scandal." But Fox News never mentioned the skin color of ACORN workers! But since many ACORN workers have actually been convicted of crimes including voter fraud, shouldn't that be reported as news?

It sounds like what Maddow and Letterman are really advocating is that news organizations should not report politically incorrect news!

Maddow then says that scaring white people is good politics on the Conservative side and it always has been. Letterman agrees. They've been doing it for decades!

Were Letterman and Madow asleep during the entire Bush administration? Were they on an eight year expedition in Antarctica when Bush was President? Do they not remember the hysterical scare tactics by the Left against all things Conservative?

As just one example, do they not remember the Patriot Act? Judging from the reaction of the Left you would have thought the Patriot Act proved that George Bush was Adolf Hitler reincarnated! No, wait, the Left actually compared Bush to Hitler. Talk about stirring up the base!

Back then I attended a conference of journalists, librarians and a few other academics at Oxford University at which one of the topics was Patriot Act. Talk about scare tactics! You would have thought the Patriot Act was the beginning of totalitarianism in America. Out of the dozens of participants at this conference, I was the only one who defended the Patriot Act.

I fully acknowledged that there were some provisions in the Patriot Acts that were indeed scary and needed to be changed, but I appealed (in vain) to everyone not to dismiss the entire act because it contained some very good and important provisions. I was the only one--the only one--there who had actually read the Patriot Act!

Anyway, for Maddow and Letterman to act as if it is only conservatives who stir up their base with scare tactics would have been funny were it not so ignorant.

Then Letterman blames the Right for fanning the flame of racism!

Does he live in a bubble? (yes). It is almost always the Left that plays the race card and fans the racism flame! Remember the Journolist in a "reputable" Leftist journalist actually recommended smearing Right wingers with the charge of racism just as a political strategy! Then, of course, there is our own "post-racial" President who, when a white police officer was accused of racism by a black professor, our President--without even knowing the facts of the case--automatically and publicly implied that the entire police force was racist!

FoxNews, Talk radio and the TEA parties simply do not have the equivalent of Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, the NAACP, or other race-baiters.

I came away from this clip (below) thinking that Letterman and Maddow actually believe the nonsense they are spouting. They live in a Left wing bubble and honestly don't seem to know any better. Wasn't it Ronald Reagan who said something like, "It's not that liberals don't know much, its that so much of what they know, just isn't so."

No comments: